Southern California -- this just in

LAPD detectives investigate newly disclosed priest abuse files

February 5, 2013 | 8:47
am

Los Angeles Police Department detectives who specialize in child sexual abuse cases have begun examining a trove of newly disclosed priest abuse files to determine whether there are cases that can be prosecuted.

Capt.
Fabian Lizarraga said detectives "are currently reviewing the [files],
to see exactly what we have.... Then we'll have to see what, if any, laws apply and if they're within statute," he said.

Detectives are limited by a law that only allows the prosecution of incidents since 1988. Many of the files appear to pre-date that year.

Lizarraga said the LAPD will be focusing specifically Los Angeles-based priests.

The LAPD decided to launch the review after the Los Angeles Roman Catholic Archdiocese last week posted on its website tens of
thousands of pages of previously secret personnel files for 122 priests
accused of molesting children.

"I find these files to be brutal
and painful reading. The behavior described in these files is terribly
sad and evil," Archbishop Jose Gomez wrote in a letter announcing the release of the records.

Allegations against some of the priests contained in the records have been known for some time. And it remains unclear whether detectives will be able to build additional criminal cases in the long-running scandal.

On Jan. 21, The Times obtained files involving
14 clerics accused of abuse. Last week, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles posted
on its website tens of thousands of pages of the previously secret personnel
files of 122 additional priests accused of molesting children

They laid out in the words of Cardinal Roger Mahony and Bishop Thomas Curry how the
church hierarchy had plotted to keep law enforcement from learning that
children had been molested at the hands of priests.

To stave off
investigations, Mahony and Curry gave priests who they knew had abused
children out-of-state assignments and kept them from seeing therapists
who might alert authorities. Mahony and Curry both issued
apologies, with the cardinal saying he had not realized the extent of
harm done to children until he met with victims during civil litigation.
"I am sorry," he said.

Victims called for new criminal
investigations and the Los Angeles County district attorney's office
said it was reviewing the newly released files.

On Monday, Los Angeles Unified School District Supt. John Deasy also said
that the school system would cross-reference its employment
records with documents made public by both the archdiocese and the Boy
Scouts, another organization accused of concealing
molestation allegations.

“We are in the business of insuring that schools are safe and that students are free from predators,” Deasy said.

An ex-priest who allegedly admitted a sexual relationship with a minor remained employed by the LAUSD for more than a decade despite several warning flags about his background.

Joseph Pina is also said in internal church documents to have
admitted to repeated “boundary issues” with women throughout his career
in the clergy. An internal 1993 psychological evaluation by the L.A. archdiocese concluded that Pina “remains a serious risk for acting out.”

Nine years later, L.A. Unified hired him as a community outreach
coordinator for its $19.5-billion school construction effort. In that
position, Pina came in frequent contact with families at community
events but did not work directly with children in schools.

No allegations of impropriety
have emerged during Pina's employment with L.A. Unified. But Deasy said the district has severed ties with Pina,
adding that the district never should have hired him given his
background.

A church spokesman said Monday that it did warn the school district
in the form of a questionnaire that L.A. Unified sent to the archdiocese
in August 2001.

"In response to the question: 'Should the Los Angeles Unified School
District consider anything else regarding this candidate's employment
suitability?' the archdiocese checked the box 'yes,' adding that we
would 'not recommend him for a position in the schools,' " Tod Tamberg,
director of media relations, said in a statement.

"In response to the next question on the form, 'Would you hire this
person again?' the archdiocese checked the box 'no,' " Tamberg said.

"There is no indication in our files of any follow-up from LAUSD once
the form was returned to the LAUSD," he said in the statement.

Deasy said the district was researching any past contact with the
archdiocese as part of a larger investigation into how Pina was hired.

The district could find no record of the questionnaire, Deasy said.
At that time, the facilities division handled its own hiring to
insulate the building program from potential political influence over
billions of dollars in contracts.

The church waited years to report Pina's alleged sexual misconduct to
police. And Deasy questioned why the church wouldn't do more to warn
school officials about molestation allegations.

"Why wouldn't someone pick up the phone and notify us if there was something as egregious as is now being alleged?" he said.

But there were other red flags that were not acted on.

The allegations against Pina were included in two front-page Times stories about the priest scandal in 2002 and 2006.

A district internal review has determined that a staffer noticed
Pina's name in published accounts, Deasy said. The employee passed the
information to senior officials in the facilities division, Deasy said.

The employee recalled that officials decided to take no action
because Pina had not been convicted of a crime, according to Deasy.